Alternative Dispute Resolutions Lawyer in Pennsylvania

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Lawsuits can drag on for years, while parties become entrenched in their positions, afraid that ceding any ground will be perceived as a sign of weakness. Meanwhile, businesses divert precious time, money, and personnel to a conflict that is causing them nothing but aggravation.

Alternative Dispute Resolution, known as ADR, is a way to alleviate that pain.

ADR is a fair, efficient, and economical means to obtain the best possible results when disputes arise, while preserving business relationships with the opposing party and avoiding contentious litigation. It is an alternative to litigation, not “litigation lite.”

For 25 years, Harry T. Mondoil, Esq. has provided a full range of neutral, even-handed ADR services that businesses and individuals have relied upon to resolve disputes ranging from thousands to millions of dollars, as well as disputes involving parties seeking non-monetary and statutory remedies.

He concentrates on business-to-business disputes, individual-to-business disputes that do not involve mass-market consumer form agreements, and individual-to-individual disputes in matters that do not involve domestic relations.

Mr. Mondoil approaches ADR from a transactional lawyer’s perspective ― which focuses on the success of business endeavors ― as opposed to a litigation lawyer’s perspective, which thrives on conflict.

In addition to arbitration and mediation services, Mr. Mondoil also provides:

Neutral Case Evaluation

Neutral Fact Finding

Facilitation of Corporate, Commercial, and Real Estate Contracts and Transactions

Mr. Mondoil handles ADR cases in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. He will also handle cases in other jurisdictions if the case can be handled remotely by video or audio connection, or, if his presence is required in the other jurisdiction, the size, complexity or importance of the case justifies his travel expense.

Arbitration

Mr. Mondoil has handled hundreds of arbitrations through the American Arbitration Association (AAA) as well as court-annexed and private arbitrations ― both as a sole arbitrator and a member of three-person arbitration panels. He understands that each case is unique, and he works with the parties to tailor a structure that they wish to operate within, while still applying his own logical, thorough, and detail-oriented factual and legal analysis of each matter.

Sole arbitrator in several arbitrations under the federal Special Binding Arbitration Program for Covered Dealers and Covered Manufacturers, which gave appeal rights to certain automobile dealers whose dealerships were or to be terminated by certain automobile manufacturers in the wake of the automobile industry restructuring early in the Great Recession. This program served an important public interest by providing thousands of dealers who had lost their dealerships by unilateral action of their manufacturers with due process and an opportunity to prove that their dealerships were viable and should be continued, renewed or reinstated.

Panelist on three-person arbitration panel that heard and decided a case involving claims for $15 million in damages and non-monetary relief. These claims arose out of an alleged breach of contract representations and warranties in an asset acquisition agreement in the propane gas industry, and breach of a related severance pay agreement.

Panelist on three-person arbitration panel that heard and decided a case involving an internal partnership dispute and a demand by several partners against another partner and the partnership for an investigative audit of the partnership books and records. The partnership owned a mixed-use commercial and apartment complex. The Pennsylvania Superior Court confirmed the arbitration award.

Sole arbitrator in an international arbitration involving a claim for $3.5 million for an alleged breach of a stock purchase agreement, misrepresentation and indemnification in the information technology industry.

Panelist on three-person arbitration panel that heard and decided an international arbitration between a Chinese manufacturer of clothing accessories and an American distributor. The claim arose out of an alleged breach of their distribution agreement, with a demand for $718,000 in damages. In issuing its award, the panel had to resolve a hotly contested issue regarding whether it could award as damages commissions on future sales as they occurred, or only the present value of the commissions reasonably expected to be earned on future sales.

Sole arbitrator in a binding arbitration involving claims of contract breach of warranty and products liability, in the paper-manufacturing, printing and packaging industries, which was referred by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Mediation

Mr. Mondoil has mediated cases for the AAA and U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as well as private cases. He is also a qualified mediator for the Philadelphia County Commerce Court. His approach is to allow parties a full and fair opportunity to be heard and then help them find mutually beneficial, workable solutions that consider their perspective ― as well as the perspectives of all involved ― while allowing the parties to take an active role in achieving their desired result.

A dispute between a builder and property owner involving the construction of a continuing care facility, which their counsel, who were partners in two major Philadelphia law firms, were unable to resolve by direct negotiation. The satisfactory resolution of this dispute allowed the project, which had been held up by the dispute, to go forward.

A claim by an employee against his employer for sexual-orientation harassment. The case had an interesting twist. The employee claimed that he was heterosexual, but was perceived to be homosexual by management, which harassed him for that reason.

He has been recognized by counsel for the results achieved. As stated by an attorney who represented an employee with a racial discrimination claim against his employer in a mediation that was successfully resolved in one day:

Harry, much thanks for your considerable efforts and patience yesterday helping us forge a settlement. It seemed like both sides left not merely satisfied, but indeed pleased, with the outcome. I suppose that reflects quite well upon the mediator!

― MEW, Esq.

Training

AAA Party-Appointed Arbitrators: Dealing with the Presumption of Partisanship, 2016

AAA Clarity in Award Writing, 2016

AAA It's Not Just “Litigation Lite” ― Making Rulings on Evidentiary Objections, 2015

AAA Managing a Successful Arbitration, 2013

AAA Webinar, What’s a Respondent Like You Doing in a Place Like This? Confronting Arbitrability and Jurisdiction Issues in Arbitration, 2013

AAA Webinar, How to Become a More Innovative Neutral or Advocate: Applying Cutting Edge Innovation Management Techniques to Your ADR Practice, 2011

The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contact through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.